Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Welshman, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Welshman, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1997 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

research-article

The Medical Officer of Health in England and Wales, 1900–1974: watchdog or lapdog?


John Welshman
, Research Assistant

The Wellcome Unit for the History of Medicine 45–47 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6PE

The recent revival of interest in the potential of preventive medicine, reflected in its re-emergence as a medical specialism and in monitoring and campaigning activity at the local level, has been accompanied by growing interest in the history of public health. In particular, the work of the Medical Officers of Health (MOsH), the doctors appointed by many local authorities after 1850, has come under closer scrutiny. However, whereas historians have acknowledged that the MOsH played a key role in tackling environmental health and infectious disease in the second half of the nineteenth century, judgements have been less favourable for the period since 1900. It is alleged that the MOsH produced repetitive and complacent reports, delayed the introduction of immunization, and were seduced away from public health by hospital administration. Both they and their counterparts in the School Medical Service ignored wider threats to health such as malnutrition and unemployment, and campaigning on these issues was left to other individuals and pressure groups. Furthermore, it is argued that after the establishment of the National Health Service in 1948, MOsH failed to exploit the potential of health education, lagged behind thinking on social work, and were slow to develop services for ‘community care’. According to this analysis, the demise of the MOH in the 1974 health service reorganization represented the logical culmination of trends in the previous 75 years. This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of this interpretation, partly through a case-study based on the Midlands city of Leicester. It argues that, although some MOsH were complacent, all operated within the limitations of important local and national constraints, and that, given these restrictions on their room for manoeuvre, many were remarkably innovative and imaginative. The paper concludes that, until further research is undertaken, the charges levelled against these doctors remain largely unproven.

Keywords: Medical Officer of Health, public health, Leicester, Health Committee


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Soc Hist MedHome page
M. Gorsky
The British National Health Service 1948-2008: A Review of the Historiography
Soc Hist Med, December 1, 2008; 21(3): 437 - 460.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
AJPHHome page
R. M. M. Domenech and C. Castaneda
Redefining Cancer during the Interwar Period: British Medical Officers of Health, State Policy, Managerialism, and Public Health
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2007; 97(9): 1563 - 1571.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
M. Gorsky
Local leadership in public health: the role of the medical officer of health in Britain, 1872-1974
J Epidemiol Community Health, June 1, 2007; 61(6): 468 - 472.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.